Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 5.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

if everyone in this thread just agrees to agree with you will you please stop? i'm not sure how many more pages of you posting the exact same post on the damn bus drivers getting lost we can take. i

Why do you like to repeat yourself multiple times? Its very annoying.

In sum....

nothing about this extravagant spectacle is sensible.

im not advocating a US BID but its likely other new horizons or other more compelling bids will materialize for 32 then 36 then 40 also.

it'll never be perfect time for the US, luck is as likely.

did the US ever win cuz the ioc was dying for or really wanted an american games?

also:

durban is pretty small for a summer games

is it well developed enough?

can they afford the debt?

will there be outcry about waste in a region/country with so much other social need?

whatever series ends up in Africa its going to be a headache for years leading in an probably after

Link to post
Share on other sites

durban is pretty small for a summer games

is it well developed enough?

can they afford the debt?

will there be outcry about waste in a region/country with so much other social need?

whatever series ends up in Africa its going to be a headache for years leading in an probably after

Durban is not "pretty small". It's the largest metropolitan area on the Indian Ocean & is a tad larger at 3.4 million, than your precious San Diego's 3.3 million. So IDK why you keep saying that. It could also be an African "beach" Games which is what you seem to love & always advocate with San Diego. So why not have that on an entirely new continent.

Yes, Durban is well developed enough. Where have you been the past few years then. They have the stadium already there. They have the sports precinct to house other venues. The ideal weather in the Games time window. A new airport that would undoubtedly be expanded in the future. They at least have just as much, if not more than San Diego does.

I'm sure that the IOC isn't going to expect the same kind of grandiosity with the South Africans that they got with the Chinese & the Russians. Plus, I'm sure that the South Africans would want to anyway. They're approaching this more pragmatic than the Chinese & the Russians did.

And so much social need? Can't we say that about Brazil, too. But that didn't stop the IOC from awarding Rio 2016. I always find those arguments so disingenuous, when there's so much "social need" everywhere in the world today, including right here in the good ole U.S. of A. The homeless & going to bed hungry here are no different than over there.

*wouldn't want to anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But all of the above was made before RSA made their announcement. I am sure the thinking will start to shift to 2026 once they get back from Sochi.

If they bid for 2026, they will win. The US will not have a shot at Summer Games until the late 40's. Those are, of course, my opinions, but I feel very, very confident of them.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If they bid for 2026, they will win. The US will not have a shot at Summer Games until the late 40's. Those are, of course, my opinions, but I feel very, very confident of them.

But it's a bad move if they keep looking into Summer hosts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they bid for 2026, they will win. The US will not have a shot at Summer Games until the late 40's. Those are, of course, my opinions, but I feel very, very confident of them.

I'd agree.

The USOC can choose:

Reno 2026 and Toronto 2032

OR

Calgary 2026/30 and Los Angeles/Chicago/NYC/DC 2032.

I know which one I'd find more exciting.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

nothing about this extravagant spectacle is sensible.

im not advocating a US BID but its likely other new horizons or other more compelling bids will materialize for 32 then 36 then 40 also.

it'll never be perfect time for the US, luck is as likely.

did the US ever win cuz the ioc was dying for or really wanted an american games?

also:

durban is pretty small for a summer games

is it well developed enough?

can they afford the debt?

will there be outcry about waste in a region/country with so much other social need?

whatever series ends up in Africa its going to be a headache for years leading in an probably after

The US will be very compelling by 2032. I see an American bid as virtually unbeatable in 2032 if the US doesn't successfully bid for Winter Games before then.

Consider, the two biggest challenges to the US are: 1.) Africa. Never hosted. Wrongly marginalized and forgotten. The IOC will not want the ultimate sentimental underdog to be trounced by the privileged, big, bad superpower that takes everything for granted. 2.) Europe. If Europe is forced to wait four cycles before hosting again, the IOC will not ask them to wait five. Period. Therefore, if the US doesn't (or can't) land 2024, there's no point in coming back for 2028.

After the IOC's takes care of Africa and Europe, who is going to propose a more compelling bid than the US? Canada? No. Istanbul? No. Shanghai? No. Doha? No. Delhi? No. By 2032, it will be HIGH time to return to North America.

Mark my words, if the US hosts 2026, Toronto will host 2032. No, I don't have a crystal ball, but I think the odds are sky high.

I'd agree.

The USOC can choose:

Reno 2026 and Toronto 2032

OR

Calgary 2026/30 and Los Angeles/Chicago/NYC/DC 2032.

I know which one I'd find more exciting.

Exactly. Except (I hope) for the Reno part. Make it Denver or Anchorage instead, please! Otherwise, the IOC will be so disgusted by Reno that they won't be ready to come back to the USA even by the 40s. Reno is an armpit, people.

If it were up to me, the US would not bid for anything, Summer or Winter until they bid for 2032.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The US will be very compelling by 2032. I see an American bid as virtually unbeatable in 2032 if the US doesn't successfully bid for Winter Games before then.

Consider, the two biggest challenges to the US are: 1.) Africa. Never hosted. Wrongly marginalized and forgotten. The IOC will not want the ultimate sentimental underdog to be trounced by the privileged, big, bad superpower that takes everything for granted. 2.) Europe. If Europe is forced to wait four cycles before hosting again, the IOC will not ask them to wait five. Period. Therefore, if the US doesn't (or can't) land 2024, there's no point in coming back for 2028.

After the IOC's takes care of Africa and Europe, who is going to propose a more compelling bid than the US? Canada? No. Istanbul? No. Shanghai? No. Doha? No. Delhi? No. By 2032, it will be HIGH time to return to North America.

Mark my words, if the US hosts 2026, Toronto will host 2032. No, I don't have a crystal ball, but I think the odds are sky high.

Exactly. Except (I hope) for the Reno part. Make it Denver or Anchorage instead, please! Otherwise, the IOC will be so disgusted by Reno that they won't be ready to come back to the USA even by the 40s. Reno is an armpit, people.

If it were up to me, the US would not bid for anything, Summer or Winter until they bid for 2032.

excuse me, London is part of Europe. have we forgotten our geography lesson or are you saying that it's not part of the continent.

as for the Africa (durban) bid, i know a lot of you want to do tick the box for africa but again it not about the tick box it's about which host has a better narrative.

the 'we've never hosted the Olympics before and now is our time' is a bit of a weak story line.

london had to stories to play duing there bid. the inspire a generation theme, the third time they will host the games and the gentrification of a industrial part of the east end.

what the narrative for durban?

usa and particularly LA has a better chance of winning 2024. i speculate the la river gentrification, it's multiculturalism (specially in California) and the fact that it's the third time it's going to bid will play a big part in the La narrative.

Link to post
Share on other sites

excuse me, London is part of Europe. have we forgotten our geography lesson or are you saying that it's not part of the continent.

as for the Africa (durban) bid, i know a lot of you want to do tick the box for africa but again it not about the tick box it's about which host has a better narrative.

the 'we've never hosted the Olympics before and now is our time' is a bit of a weak story line.

london had to stories to play duing there bid. the inspire a generation theme, the third time they will host the games and the gentrification of a industrial part of the east end.

what the narrative for durban?

usa and particularly LA has a better chance of winning 2024. i speculate the la river gentrification, it's multiculturalism (specially in California) and the fact that it's the third time it's going to bid will play a big part in the La narrative.

If that's LA's narrative, that's a pretty weak story line. The key for any future LA bid, particularly 2024, is to differentiate it from the 1984 bid. Reviving a part of the city.. good. Multiculturalism.. not so good. Potential third time host.. irrelevant. London could play that up better because their first 2 hostings weren't their best foot forward (1908 was as a replacement for Rome and 1948 was the austerity games following WWII.. so 2012 was really their first real serious hosting effort.

As for Durban.. their storyline is a lot more than that. They're going to play up how they want to represent a continent of a billion people. They'll play up how dozens of Olympic champions have come from Africa and this is a chance for their home continent to host an Olympics. They'll play up the success of the 2010 World Cup and how they can build on that legacy by bringing the Olympics to South Africa.

So you're right, it's not about the tick box. But Durban can offer a pretty compelling narrative. No, they're not not a major world city, but I don't think that's a deal-breaker for them. The question here is what does Durban offer the Olympic movement. The answer is that it leaves an Olympic legacy on a continent that doesn't have one and perhaps gets not just 1 country but an entire continent to engage in the Olympics. That's worth a lot more than a tick box.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

as for the Africa (durban) bid, i know a lot of you want to do tick the box for africa but again it not about the tick box it's about which host has a better narrative.

what the narrative for durban?

You just answered your own question. Again, worked for Rio 2016 & their "map".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Durban is not "pretty small". It's the largest metropolitan area on the Indian Ocean & is a tad larger at 3.4 million, than your precious San Diego's 3.3 million. So IDK why you keep saying that. It could also be an African "beach" Games which is what you seem to love & always advocate with San Diego. So why not have that on an entirely new continent.

Yes, Durban is well developed enough. Where have you been the past few years then. They have the stadium already there. They have the sports precinct to house other venues. The ideal weather in the Games time window. A new airport that would undoubtedly be expanded in the future. They at least have just as much, if not more than San Diego does.

I'm sure that the IOC isn't going to expect the same kind of grandiosity with the South Africans that they got with the Chinese & the Russians. Plus, I'm sure that the South Africans would want to anyway. They're approaching this more pragmatic than the Chinese & the Russians did.

And so much social need? Can't we say that about Brazil, too. But that didn't stop the IOC from awarding Rio 2016. I always find those arguments so disingenuous, when there's so much "social need" everywhere in the world today, including right here in the good ole U.S. of A. The homeless & going to bed hungry here are no different than over there.

*wouldn't want to anyway.

city proper is only 600,000 for Durban but i hear ya, region is similar pop to sd county

gdp

durban 47.6 bil

san diego 188.4 bil

thats 1/4 sd!

do they really need/want whats necessary to host a summer games? will it be wt elephant style later?

agree about the beach sport precinct just asking if the city balance is really ready.

not advocating sd vs durban just using it for comparison

Totally worked for Rio 2016. Did you forget that one already.

it really did ^_^

Link to post
Share on other sites

San Diego proper is only 1.3 million. Even that's still too small for a Summer Olympics if that's all you were using for Durban.

And I know that you're not necessarily making it a San Diego vs Durban. But I wanted to use it for perspective since you're such a San Diego trumpet wagon.

And if South Africa really wasn't a viable candidate, you wouldn't have to many in Olympic circles talking about an African Olympics sooner rather than later. Again, the IOC isn't going to expect grandiosity from the South Africans, & I doubt that the South Africans would give them that even if it was what the IOC wanted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's easy to talk about the US being a shoe in in 2032, but which city? Neither LA, New York or Chicago seem like locks to even be interested. Since the US economy is likely to further deteriorate by then it's hard to imagine Chicago will have a better bid for 2032 than they did for 2016. (You can't grow your way out of debt when you have a huge trade deficit and are bleeding capital.)

Los Angeles is the easy frontrunner for making a bid, but I frankly can't see them having a snowball's chance in hell of convincing the IOC to go back instead to LA instead of Paris, Shanghai, etc. Any LA bid is going to be based around existing venues. That will appeal to taxpayers in the US but not the international voters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

....but how basic can it be for a summer games?

- what will be too much to ask of a smallish city without money to burn?

- seems like rational heads could easily decide it's not time yet.

- i cant believe anyone's going to want to see an elephant ride a mouse just to say "we did it!".

-having said that they have such an amazing culture to share, id welcome it if it happened


@FYI re:durban

p.s. i remember being the one pushing Durban when this forum always trumpeted cape t, cape t, cape t. :lol: :lol: :lol:

just sayin' ;)

Edited by paul
Link to post
Share on other sites

excuse me, London is part of Europe. have we forgotten our geography lesson or are you saying that it's not part of the continent.

as for the Africa (durban) bid, i know a lot of you want to do tick the box for africa but again it not about the tick box it's about which host has a better narrative.

the 'we've never hosted the Olympics before and now is our time' is a bit of a weak story line.

london had to stories to play duing there bid. the inspire a generation theme, the third time they will host the games and the gentrification of a industrial part of the east end.

what the narrative for durban?

usa and particularly LA has a better chance of winning 2024. i speculate the la river gentrification, it's multiculturalism (specially in California) and the fact that it's the third time it's going to bid will play a big part in the La narrative.

Um, of course London is in Europe. Why the obnoxious attitude?

Historically, the IOC has never gone more than three cycles between European hostings.

London 2012

Rio 2016

Tokyo 2020

If former patterns hold true it should be Europe in 2024 (the third cycle). However, if South Africa (or some other non-European bid) wins, that would push the next European hosting to 2028 -- a four cycle wait is historically unprecedented. The IOC will not preempt Europe AGAIN (a five cycle wait) in favor of the US. There's no brain surgery here. Just math.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They already have quite a bit in place already. How much more do you want?! They don't need to build a resort out of thin air like Sochi did.

And why do you keep saying "smallish" city?! Haven't we already covered that. Why would it be okay for smallish San Diego but not for "smallish" Durban, according to you.

Obviously you can't see the bigger picture, & it's a good thing that you're not part of the "rational heads" that get to decide.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's easy to talk about the US being a shoe in in 2032, but which city? Neither LA, New York or Chicago seem like locks to even be interested. Since the US economy is likely to further deteriorate by then it's hard to imagine Chicago will have a better bid for 2032 than they did for 2016. (You can't grow your way out of debt when you have a huge trade deficit and are bleeding capital.)

Los Angeles is the easy frontrunner for making a bid, but I frankly can't see them having a snowball's chance in hell of convincing the IOC to go back instead to LA instead of Paris, Shanghai, etc. Any LA bid is going to be based around existing venues. That will appeal to taxpayers in the US but not the international voters.

You are presuming a great deal about the global economy and the IOC -- namely that the future will simply be an amplified version of the present. I don't see you being correct.

I think it's unlikely that the US has decades of doom and gloom ahead. History clearly shows that the size of a nation's economy is not the index by which the Games are awarded anyway.

I think American Games will always be more fiscally responsible than Games held elsewhere and I think at some point the IOC will embrace that. The tide will turn regarding gigantism and the Olympics. I believe there is a real chance the IOC could get itself into trouble with none but less desirable nations willing to bid for the Games. I think existing and temporary venues will become increasingly appealing.

I also think the IOC will recognize that it needs to return to the USA because it is such a major market and the single largest supporter of the Olympic Movement.

However, I firmly believe that more pressing priorities are likely to draw the IOC elsewhere for 2024 and 2028. The US' case will not be weaker in 2032. It will be stronger -- due largely to the IOC's commitment to global diversity and the fact that the US (and all of North America) will not have hosted Summer Games for 36 years (9 cycles). These geopolitical considerations will inform the IOC's decision more than anything else. The technical quality of the bid will certainly be good enough to win. Again, history shows that technical competency is often the last criteria the IOC takes into account -- just ask Rio and (I suspect) Durban.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i think sd is waaaaaay more developed and glamorous than durban. no offense s.africa

and beach-wise NOOOOOOOOOOOO contest B)

(durbans gdp is only 47bill ??!!) :o


I think it's unlikely that the US has decades of doom and gloom ahead.

i pray you are correct

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe there is a real chance the IOC could get itself into trouble with none but less desirable nations willing to bid for the Games.

-maybe that's our only hope / crisis and the us is there

-until we're needed we wont be needed :(

Yeah, & that's why Rio trumpeted "wayyyy" more developed & "glamorous" Madrid, Chicago & Tokyo. Just sayin'. Which says nothing of glamor-less, venues-less & infrastructure lacking Sochi.

NO-NO-NO

Rio may have its dirty dangerous underbelly but its always had glamor

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, "glamor" is places like London, Paris, New York & Milan. Rio to me is nothing but a party town, with Carnival & beautiful sandy beaches, much like the French Quater, South Beach & Las Vegas. A place where you can get down & party! That's why I'm so looking forward to their opening ceremonies! I'm hoping for a real SAMBA par-tayyyy come Aug. 2016!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...